home

House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry

Raw Story reports:

House Democrats say they will force a vote in the House Judiciary Committee to put the Republican majority on the record with regards to investigating discredited White House correspondent Jeff Gannon who allegedly had access to confidential information, including a memorandum naming CIA operative Valerie Plame, RAW STORY has learned.

The procedure, called a Resolution of Inquiry, will be directed to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and departing Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, senior House aides say. Ridge has jurisdiction over the Secret Service, which is responsible for presidential security; Gonzales oversees the FBI, whose databases are used for criminal background checks.

The resolution requests all documents on how Gannon was personally cleared and repeatedly allowed access to the White House, aides tell RAW STORY. It also calls for any information the departments have on White House policies about how an applicant would go about getting clearance in general.

< Police Probe Judge's Relatives Murders | Juveniles on Death Row Express Relief >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 11:18:13 AM EST
    You are assuming the resolution will pass. Somehow I think it won't.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimcee on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 01:17:30 PM EST
    Go for the vote but I'm not sure why the Left has such a heart-on for this story. It isn't going anywhere anyway because all administrations try to manage the press as best they can and some do it better than others. They should stop wasting their time on this trivia but somehow they can't come up with anything better. I'm sure if the Bushies are half as evil as the Left believes there has to be something juicier to go after. But alas....

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 01:34:59 PM EST
    Any time the Justice Dept. wants to investigate the affidavits of the latest stolen election, then they can claim to be an actual gov't instead of part of the fraud. Gonzales could change the shame on his gravestone with a few well-placed acts of courage. But he won't. He's another lying, stinking, $R. He'll go to his grave a fraud. Like both of you cats.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 01:46:28 PM EST
    Let's see- demand a vote on an inquiry and waste time and money over pointless drivel on who gets a day pass to press briefings, but not allow any votes on Judicial Nominees. I am understanding the term "Idiotarian" more and more. I'm not saying I'm okay with it, But I Understand....

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 02:44:58 PM EST
    Let's see- demand a vote on an inquiry and waste time and money over pointless drivel on who gets a day pass to press briefings, but not allow any votes on Judicial Nominees. I am understanding the term "Idiotarian" more and more. I'm not saying I'm okay with it, But I Understand....
    LMFAO at the hypocrites. Paula Jones, anyone????

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 02:47:31 PM EST
    The story won't go away if he was given preferential treatment and colluded with the White House as a lobbyist for their policies while posing as a reporter. Watergate was just a little story that wouldn't go away...

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 02:48:01 PM EST
    LMFAO at the hypocrites. Paula Jones, anyone????
    ken starr!!! this list could get exhaustive.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 03:28:11 PM EST
    I just stopped by here ... and, after reading some of the comments above, I began to wonder if anyone is old enough to remember the Profumo Scandal in Great Britain. I was a child then (circa 1957 or 58 or 59) but I do recall that several ministers were forced to resign and at least part of the government toppled because of the mere potential that sex was traded for diplomatic info with a cabinet member. The focus for me as well as a number of my friends is this: Did an individual use his position improperly or illegally in the overall matter AND was the use premised on trading sexual favors in some manner AND did this lead to information being exchanged/traded in such a way as to compromise security? That is the real focus; the focus is not merely what was JG doing in the conference room.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 04:15:23 PM EST
    This is hilarious. The Left, reduced to wasting Gov't time and *our* money on an absurd witch-hunt, for no other reason than to feed it to their "base". Good "base", now beg; ok, enjoy this scrap.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 04:21:39 PM EST
    Why blame the Dems for the stolen election fake $R gov't and its acts of tyranny? Bush, not elected either time. Enuf' said.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 04:36:03 PM EST
    I began to wonder if anyone is old enough to remember the Profumo Scandal in Great Britain. I was a child then (circa 1957 or 58 or 59) but I do recall that several ministers were forced to resign and at least part of the government toppled because of the mere potential that sex was traded for diplomatic info with a cabinet member. chrisp, I mentioned this in an earlier thread about Gannon, but people say that they don't have a problem with a hooker, let alone a gay one, lobbying softball questions at Bush while evading the SS scrutiny by going on daily passes instead of a badge as the other correspondents have. I guess it's okay to have hookers in the White House(a tribute to JFK, I guess) as long as they're not on the clock.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#12)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 06:37:48 PM EST
    Either the SS checked him out and felt that his website was harmless, and his complete absence of journalistic experience was inconsequential, or someone walked him through.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 06:55:52 PM EST
    mfox - Paula Jones - Bad choice. She won. BTW - She isn't related to Helen Thomas. Crisp & Dearest No Name - You might ask Barney Franks that question.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 08:52:23 PM EST
    This has got to be a first...the left going after a reporter and his sources. Like Bill Clinton didn't treat Helen Thomas different from Bush. Fine. So be it. But I expect to see the NYT reporter who broke the Abu Ghraib story taken to task for obtaining and exploiting a SECRET/NOFORN document (Taguba Report). I also want a congressional investigation into Woodward & Bernstein and the identity of Deep Throat.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 05:55:04 AM EST
    DA - Who knows what he did. Do you? But it is a fair question, don't you think? Besides, if Byrd can resign from the KKK and reform himself, why can't Gannon (If he ever did.) quit being a male prostitute and reform himself? Oh, I see. Only Democrats can reform.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 10:11:49 AM EST
    I am so glad to know the Democrats are working so hard at fulfilling their duties this term. From arguing about Janet Jackson's nipples to investigating pseudo-journalists, they're really on the ball.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 11:04:17 AM EST
    Actually, the idea is to find out how a pseudo-journalist got into the White House press corp(past the Secret Service, which last time I checked, was in charge of vetting everyone going into the WH, tourists aside, of course) not what the now-well-documented activities of said pseudo-journalist were.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 09:37:01 PM EST
    Oh, I get it. You can get around the first amendment, free press stuff by relegating someone to "pseudo-journalist" status. That way they're not really a journalist and are exempt from everything.

    Re: House to Force Vote on Gannon Inquiry (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 08:47:23 PM EST
    If Gannon was a poor prostitute trying to reform himself by getting old clients to fake him a job at the whitehouse, then how come he did not pull his ads for his prostitution services? It does not sound like a very sincere effort.